[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 483: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/bbcode.php on line 112: preg_replace(): The /e modifier is no longer supported, use preg_replace_callback instead
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4752: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4754: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4755: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
[phpBB Debug] PHP Warning: in file [ROOT]/includes/functions.php on line 4756: Cannot modify header information - headers already sent by (output started at [ROOT]/includes/functions.php:3887)
Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO : UFO's / Aliens / ET's - Page 4 • SCEPCOP Forum








View Active Topics          View Your Posts          Latest 100 Topics          Switch to Mobile

Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Discussion about UFO's, Aliens, ET's, Alien Abductions, Ancient Astronaut theories, etc.

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby really? » 01 Jun 2010, 21:57

really?
 
Posts: 1009
Joined: 06 Mar 2010, 20:58

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 02 Jun 2010, 02:33

Really,

I will simply say to you what I said to Nostradamus,if you think there is something wrong with my arguments,
you cannot simply state it is wrong, without giving reason why it is wrong. This shows that you are not engaging
what has been said and refusing to discuss. In fact you seem to be oblivious of the subject matter of this thread,
which is not to offer empirical evidence for the existence of ET and UFO, but to tackle common fallacies on ET/UFO.
I have rebutted many of those fallacies, so I already done my part, now if you disagree with any my rebuttals, you need
to show why they are wrong and why you are right. To be honest I am surprised that you need to be told this, as anybody
who has an education knows that points must always be backed up by reasons, illustrations and examples. If you were asked
to examine my position in a academic paper, and you simply wrote, "He's wrong" you would be failed.

In fact the inability to engage ones arguments and to instead resort to adhominems is very much characteristic of a pseduoskeptic.
I am going to start doing some quality control now and only respond to skeptics who show the effort of engaging the points laid out.
Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2010, 04:07

User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 02 Jun 2010, 04:53

Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2010, 05:31

User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 02 Jun 2010, 06:14

Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2010, 20:48

User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 02 Jun 2010, 21:36

User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 03 Jun 2010, 07:20

Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 03 Jun 2010, 10:19

Simply put Indy, if ET/UFOs were proven, we wouldn't be having this conversation. Period. There are so few, if any, ET cases that don't have questionable events surrounding the encounter that it becomes comical. I see you pointed out that I shifted the goal posts as you said I would. Fine, but I see you didn't correct your "massive amounts of..." statement, but that's to be expected. You are quick to proclaim what a skeptic is, but unfortunately, it appears to me at least you really don't understand what critical thinking is all about. Your statements tell me you are stuck in the "selective thinking and memory" routine so many believers get stuck in. They say "here's the evidence" but leave out such things as motive (could the person be lying?), alternate explanations, or simply seeing something different than what it really is (honest mistake).
Now, who the hell is talking demonic possession? I don't remember seeing that emphasized in that article and I certainly don't believe that demons play a role in ANY abduction case. However, I DO believe that there is a logical explanation for ALL of them.
BTW, I might add that I have seen the triangle UFO (probably most famously known as the Belgium UFO) quite up close (I could have hit it with a golf ball). Spooky to see at the time I might add until I realized what it really was (and it wasn't from another world.)
So, instead of giving a website of UFO research and claim that shows the evidence to support your theories, why don't you provide one example, perhaps the best one you can find, and let's see how solid of a case study it really is or if there are questionable circumstances surrounding it.
User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 03 Jun 2010, 18:19

You are repeating previous fallacies again ProWag.

You are playing the zero-sum game again, by demanding proof or something to be proven. The fact
of the matter is nothing has ever been proven. There is nothing that does not have questionable events,
even the most vigorously tested theories in science are stll questionable. All we can have is evidence, and
we have to explain that evidence with the best hypothesis that we can. However, the hypothesis has to account
for all the known facts.

You are also guilty of falsifying facts, if a witness testimony tells you, "I saw a large object the size of several foot
ball fields hover about me, then shoot out into the sky" Instead of working with the data, you will falsify the data,
by fabricating motives, "This person is lying or cannot be trusted because of x" This person stole a sweet when he
was 10 years old, this person has injested drugs at some point in his life, this person wants to make money. Now,
interesingly such concerns of finding motive does not appear when a scientist gives data, nobody lookes at the scientists
personal life, they look at the data. I submit to you the reason you have to falsify the data, is because it is impossible
for a rational person to accept the data and not use the ETH.

Now, when you say a "logical explanation for all of them" do you mean a logical explanation that includes the ETH as
a possible explanation, or one that excludes the ETH?

You asked for examples of cases that I think can only be explained by the ETH. Alright then, the following I think can
only be explained by the ETH: http://www.ufoevidence.org/documents/doc629.htm

Conclusions
In conclusion, with two highly redundant contacts -- the first with ground radar, combined with both ground and airborne visual observers, and the second with airborne radar, an airborne visual observer, and two different ground radars -- the Bentwaters-Lakenheath UFO incident represents one of the most significant radar-visual UFO cases. Taking into consideration the high credibility of information and the cohesiveness and continuity of accounts, combined with a high degree of "strangeness," it is also certainly one of the most disturbing UFO incidents known today.


Now here is my prediction(I got the last one right remember) You will not be able to explain the data as it stands, so you will falsify the data by either:

1). Fabricating motives for the researchers, personale, witnesses involved in the case
2) Forcing explanations that do not work, such as meteorite, reflections explanations
3) Inventing explanations from the argument of possibility fallacy such as all the radars malfunctioned, mass delusion
Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Eteponge » 03 Jun 2010, 18:37

I don't find the ETH Hypothesis as particularly concrete as people make it out to be, because I don't feel it's the only valid explanation for anomalous UFOs. For all we know, those anomalous UFOs that defy conventional explanations may be extra dimensional travelers, time travelers from our future, crypto-terrestrials (a race of beings that share the planet with us, but remain hidden, such as deep under the sea) as the late Mac Tonnies theorized, or something else entirely. (Note, I'm only talking about the truly unidentified UFOs that defy conventional explanations, we have no idea what they are, and where they come from.)

The Rendlesham Forest Incident at Bentwaters in December 1980 for example, two of the key military eyewitnesses in the case, John Burroughs and Sgt. Jim Penniston, have very interesting things to say. John Burroughs disappeared for 25 minutes after being struck by the blue light of the craft, as another cadet witnessed, and then was returned. Sgt. Jim Penniston touched the strange symbols on the side of a craft in the Forest and felt a shock, a jolt. Sgt. Jim Penniston, in 1994 underwent hypnosis, and John Burroughs went under hypnosis in 1988, and they both independently revealed the same consistent story regarding what was revealed to them by the occupants. They were told by the occupants that they were humans, us, who were Time Travelers from over 40,000 years from now, who came back to "repair the timeline". Both men, independently revealed this in their sessions, without having discussed it with one another until over 20 years later.

They also revealed during these sessions that these back travelers come here to harvest our DNA, because in the distant future our genetic structure breaks down, so they need to use us like "band-aids".

That suggests the possibility for more than ETH going on. Maybe it's time travelers screwing around with time and coming here to take our "purer" DNA to sustain themselves, after theirs was corrupted for whatever reason.

As for the Alien Abduction phenomenon, it has roots in traditional fairy lore, as some researchers have pointed out. There are tales from hundreds to thousands of years ago in many cultures, about elves and fairies kidnapping people, taking them to a strange land, doing strange things to them, and then returning them to their villages, and the victims come back to find that much time has passed (missing time). Which suggest it may be something going on here more than traditional ETH.

Also, in the book DMT: The Spirit Molecule, people given DMT would often hallucinate an ENTIRE Alien Abduction Experience while under the influence of the drug, and it's a chemical we produce naturally in our brains. The researchers, however, suggested not that the DMT caused the experience, but that it opened the door to the experience, rather than producing it. Suggesting the possibility that it may be a more metaphyiscal type of experience than physical.

Also, The Paracasts hosts Gene Steinberg and David Biedny have had various Alien Abductees on their show before for interviews, and when they ask them mundane questions like, "Did you go to the bathroom?", or "Where did you go to the bathroom?", during their abduction experience, they don't ever recall using the bathroom or going to the bathroom anything like that, even if the experience lasted a long time, which suggests it may be more than a physical experience. One abductee claimed that he was forced to have sex with a hybrid woman during the experience, but when David asked him what she smelled like, he said he couldn't remember a smell, and felt no wetness, which doesn't make sense physically.

Now, not all fit this mold however, you will have some who return after several days, after being physically missing, and they may come back with medical problems, alleged implants, etc. So, not all fit that mold.

My speculation, is not that one hypothesis is correct, but possibly several. Some UFO may be time travelers, others may be dimensional, others may be metaphysical / supernatural manifestations, and yet others may be ETH. I don't think they are all coming from the same place.

Just my speculation.
"I think Eteponge's Blog is a pretty cool guy. eh debates Skeptics and doesnt afraid of anything."
User avatar
Eteponge
 
Posts: 300
Joined: 06 Jun 2009, 13:26

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Indigo Child » 03 Jun 2010, 21:25

The ETH is certainly not the only explanation for genuine UFO's, as you say it is possible they are extradimensional, time travellers, cryptoterrestrial, or some kind psychic phenomenon. Unfortunately, these alternative explanations consist of too many unknowns to be viable.

Yes, we now have good reason to accept the existence of other dimensions(string theory) but we have no idea what kind of life forms would exist in other dimensions. According to Kaku, such life would not be of a physical nature. Even conventional esoteric traditions confirm that life in higher planes is non-physical. Therefore they would have no need to fly about in physical machines in their plane. Why then would they suddenly have physical machines in the physical plane?

The unknowns involved in the human time travellers theory is whether at it is possible for humans to go back in time. The best theory in support of this multiple world theory, but this theory is not proven itself, it is simply one interpretation to explain the wavefunction collapse in quantum physics, because it refuses to accept that consciousness collapses the wavefunction. However the later interpretation is the most simplest and is the prevaling one in quantum physics.

The unknowns involved in the cryptoterrestrial theory is the obvious unknowns of why they are hidden, why have we not detected them, and how can they survive down there and why don't they just come up here. I personally believe in the Naga beings that are said to inhabit the subterranian cities, but I have to set that aside, because of the lack of evidence.

The unknowns involved in the psychic manifestation theory of UFO's is how it is at all possible that the mind would manifest a physical machine that flies of its own accord and is capable of intelligent behaviour.

Therefore because of the many unknonwns involved in these alternative paranormal explanations they are not viable. On the other hand the ETH does not have any unknowns, because it is a known fact that life happens on planets capable of sustaining them. It is also known through estimation that there is staggering amount of earth-like planets in the universe. Finally, it is also known that intelligent life develops machines to travel, such as space craft to travel in space. Physical intelligent beings are technological beings.

Therefore in UFO cases where we clearly are witnessing physical machines, controlled by intelligent beings, it is clear there is a physical explanation. They are techological beings, and therefore they exist in the physical world. As it is clear that their level of technology far outstripps our level of technology, it is clear they belong to a domain where technology is far in advance of our own. It then easy to conclude that they belong to another planet in our universe. The ETH is therefore the best and simplest explanation for the generic UFO.

Now, in UFO's where we have a mix of physical and psychic facts, such as in alien abduction cases which overlap with demons, elves napping souls at night, we have to be discerning here. Clearly, in some of these stories it is not the body which is being napped, but the soul. In other words the kidnappers are spiritual entities. In the case of alien abductions, it in fact the body being napped, and they are usually escorted into a UFO(physical craft) suggesting these kidnappers are physical entities.
Indigo Child
 
Posts: 327
Joined: 22 May 2009, 08:01

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby ProfWag » 03 Jun 2010, 22:18

User avatar
ProfWag
 
Posts: 3847
Joined: 05 Aug 2009, 03:54

Re: Debunking Pseudoskepticism: Common fallacies on ET/UFO

Postby Eteponge » 04 Jun 2010, 02:09

"I think Eteponge's Blog is a pretty cool guy. eh debates Skeptics and doesnt afraid of anything."
User avatar
Eteponge
 
Posts: 300
Joined: 06 Jun 2009, 13:26

PreviousNext

Return to UFO's / Aliens / ET's

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron